Company Law : The FAQ clarifies that the Companies Act, 2013 does not restrict adjournment of a duly convened and commenced AGM. An adjourned AG...
Company Law : This FAQ examines the statutory authorities empowered to convene an Extraordinary General Meeting under the Companies Act, 2013. I...
Company Law : The 2025 amendment replaces annual DIR-3 KYC filings with a triennial compliance framework. Directors now need to file KYC once ev...
Company Law : The article explains when private companies can rely on MCA exemptions to borrow through board approval alone. It highlights the b...
Company Law : The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law...
Company Law : The MCA has widened CSR eligibility by recognizing subscriptions to Zero Coupon Zero Principal Instruments as a valid CSR activity...
Company Law : The initiative addresses inefficiencies in the current filing system and proposes consolidation and automation. It highlights a sh...
Company Law : NFRA found major deficiencies in audit documentation and archival practices. The report highlights the need for stronger controls ...
Company Law : The inspection report highlights deficiencies in audit documentation, independence monitoring and compliance with auditing standar...
Company Law : The regulator found that the audit firm lacked an effective monitoring mechanism to ensure firmwide independence policies were pro...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Sh. Laxit Awla under Section 165 of Companies Act, 2013, for exceeding directorship limits. Details on violatio...
Corporate Law : That the period of lockdown ordered by the Central Government and the State Governments including the period as may be extended ei...
Company Law : The MCA has amended the valuation rules to require Registered Valuer Organisations to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of ₹25 ...
Company Law : The Registrar of Companies penalized the company and its authorized signatory after an incorrect document was attached with Form A...
Company Law : MCA amends Schedule VII of the Companies Act to include subscription to zero coupon zero principal instruments on Social Stock Exc...
Company Law : MCA has amended the CSR Rules to recognize zero coupon zero principal instruments issued by Social Stock Exchange-listed NPOs. The...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai held that repeated return of official notices proved non-maintenance of a registered office under Section 12(1) of the ...
A massive delay in filing BEN-2 for significant beneficial ownership led to maximum penalties. The authority held that prolonged non-compliance attracts strict penal consequences.
The ROC held that no penalty is leviable as the company filed its annual return within 30 days of the notice. The ruling highlights that timely compliance can nullify penal consequences under the Companies Act.
The ROC imposed penalties for failure to follow mandatory secretarial standards in company meetings. The ruling highlights strict enforcement of compliance obligations under the Companies Act.
The ROC penalized directors for not holding mandatory Board Meetings. The ruling emphasizes strict compliance with governance requirements under the Companies Act.
ROC imposed penalties for not filing DIR-12 to record director resignation. The ruling highlights strict compliance requirements for maintaining statutory records under the Companies Act.
The authority rejected reliance on indemnity agreements to avoid statutory liability. It held that directors remain accountable for compliance failures regardless of private arrangements.
The authority penalized the company for failing to ensure minutes were signed by the Chairman as required. It held that deviation from prescribed procedure violates statutory compliance norms.
Failure to accurately record board meeting details resulted in statutory violation. Authorities imposed penalties emphasizing strict compliance with minute-keeping provisions.
The case examined whether extending redemption timelines amounts to reissuance. The Tribunal held that extensions within statutory limits qualify as variation of rights under Section 48, avoiding Section 55(3) compliance.
The authority held that financial statements adopted before audit are invalid under the Companies Act. It ruled that failure to file proper statements attracts penalty under Section 137.
